strength; but it is on you personally, on the honest man, on the just and good man, rather than on the king, that I place my reliance."

He entered on his administration, and improvement commenced. He told the king that in ten years France would hardly be known for what she had been. But while he was guiding the affairs of the nation in the only course that could possibly insure its safety, the nobles, the courtiers, the priests, the financiers, the merchants who had purchased monopolies from the government, down to the very porters whom they employed, joined in one general outcry, to drive him from his post. His colleague withdrew disheartened. But Turgot persisted, inflexible and undismayed, showing that it was still possible to avert that terrible catastrophe which every month was hastening on, until the fearful combination that had been formed against him prevailed; and he was dismissed, to the joy of the corrupt, and to the sorrow of the oppressed.

It has been well said by a British writer, that "while the courtiers of Louis XVI. drove from his councils the most upright and patriotic of his ministers, in the belief that they were sacrificing the welfare of millions to their own particular interests, they, in truth, were dooming themselves to the block, their families to ruin and exile, their order to extermination, their country to anarchy, and Europe to the sanguinary and furious war, compared with which, all the rest that have disfigured her annals, are as the sports of children; and when the king signed the order for his dismission, he signed his own death-warrant. France has, at length, succeeded in obtaining those advantages which were proposed by Turgot; but it has been after passing through an ocean of blood."

This may seem to be rather a strong case to present in illustration of the subject that we have been considering. But strong cases serve to show most clearly what are the tendencies of our actions. Although on a smaller scale, there is tendency to mischief of the same nature, when bank directors, for the sake of temporary accommodation, first expose themselves to the temptation of sacrificing the interest of stockholders to their own convenience. It is the same in all private and all public affairs. While it would be difficult to attain the assent of the community to the exstence of any one evil custom by itself, a host of evils may be tolerated Aby

a force of mutual concession and support. The passage of one bad law is often effected only by an appeal to the desire for some other law that is itself objectionable. Thus bad legislation prevails in opposition to the real will of the majority, because that will is stifled by bargaining among those who, perhaps, do not mean to be corrupt, but who scarcely reflect on the consequences of what they do.

The complaint of Turgot may be repeated, too, among us. "That very people whose welfare has been sought in framing the laws of the land, are so easily deceived, that they are in constant danger of being incited through artful misrepresentations, to turn against the regulations on which their own happiness and advancement depends."

We are a part of that people, and each of us are in some degree responsible for the correct decision of the whole. We are answerable for the use that we make of our influence on the mass, and for our neglect to use it. If we suffer improper purposes of our own to affect the zeal with which we should advocate what is right, or the energy with which we

* Westminster Review, March, 1845.

should oppose what is wrong, we are but following in the steps of those who defended corruption in France.

But to be firm, we must be independent; and to secure independence, as in the plan of Turgot, we must begin with economy, industry, and moderation in our wants. If there had been no combination for the mutual support of corruptions in France; and if the correction of one abuse could have been urged without impediments from influence founded on other abuses, so that each might have been removed singly, what distress and loss would have been avoided.

We may repose so much faith in our present system of government, as to believe that we are in no danger of any immediate convulsion. But every act of injustice, or breach of good faith, every instance in which we participate in wrong of any sort, or even suffer it to pass without rebuke, goes to swell the tide of corruption that may one day sweep away the institutions under which we now live in happiness.

While, on the other hand, by the courageous integrity that breathes forth in the carriage of the upright, by every sacrifice, however secret, that we make of interest to strengthen our principle, and every example that our lives afford of the beauty of virtue, and the power of the religion that has been revealed to us, we aid in forming the barriers that are necessary to render our frame of government perpetual.

Art. II.-MEANS OF INCREASING OUR COMMERCE WITH GERMANY.

MEASURES for increasing the direct commerce of Germany with other countries, and especially with the United States of America, are among the principal objects of the Zollverein; and are also worthy of the serious attention of the people and statesmen of this country.

Towards the end of the session of the Commercial Congress, held during the last year by the Representatives of the Zollverein States at Carlsruhe, Prussia proposed "the adoption of a joint navigation act on the part of the Zollverein States, the Hanse Towns, and other small coast states, to establish a national flag, granting to those states which are willing to act upon the principle of full reciprocity equal commercial rights under that flag; and advocated the enactment of a general law, by which differential duties, or in other words, a reduction of duties should be granted on those products from foreign countries, which were imported in vessels sailing under that flag, and on foreign articles imported in the vessels of those countries who would establish similar differential duties in favor of the products and vessels of these German States. To such vessels the said advantages would be given in all ports of the Zollverein, and of the other states between the Schelde and Elbe, both included, provided it appears from the papers of the vessels that the goods are brought directly from the country which produces them, in those vessels, to the states which unite in this measure."

The representatives of the Zollverein will act upon it during their session of this winter at Berlin. Public opinion in the German States has already declared itself so loudly in favor of this measure that its adoption appears insured.

Under the protection of a common flag, merchants and capitalists of the

interior of Germany will be enabled to enter more freely into the transatlantic trade; enjoying, together with the Hanse Towns, that carrying trade as a direct one, which is now done in an indirect way by England and other European nations. Many merchants of the interior of Germany will probably not only use the ports of the Zollverein on the Baltic, and the ports of Belgium, which has concluded a treaty with the Zollverein, but also most of all the ports of Hamburg and Bremen as their entrepots. From these ports they will send their goods in smaller ships by the safe and free navigation of the Elbe or Weser, or by railroad into the interior. This will concentrate a greater amount of business in Hamburg and Bremen. They will rise the same as the American seaport cities have risen, in proportion as railroads and steamboats have there created and facilitated business and travelling. It would be strange, if with these striking examples, which the American seaports afford, before their eyes, the people of Hamburg and Bremen should not favor every measure, which, besides increasing their own shipping, would concentrate a great deal of the business and shipping of the Zollverein in their ports. The Hanse Towns and the Zollverein States ought to feel a deep interest in their mutual welfare. The increasing import and export trade of the ports of Hamburg. and Bremen is as beneficial for them as for the Zollverein. They ought to proceed upon the principle, that as all Germans have in common, origin, wants and literature, they must have common interests, a common commerce, and a common future. Negotiations for this purpose, especially for the adoption of the above named measure, have been commenced between the Hanse Towns and the Zollverein, which seem to promise a favorable result.

Before enlarging further on the proposed measures, the position of Congress and existing treaties ought first to be considered. Several members of the House of Representatives are said to be unfavorable to any treaty of commerce, which would deprive the House of Representatives of the regu lation of so much of the tariff. The apprehended disadvantage could easily be avoided, if the conclusion of a treaty should indeed be impracticable. It is in the power of the United States to pass an act of Congress, similar to that proposed by the Zollverein. The House of Representatives would thus co-operate with the Senate in laying down the basis on which the commercial intercourse with these countries should be carried on. All difficulties could be thus removed, and mutual advantages could be gained. This method appears to several gentlemen, as we understand, to be preferable to attaining the same object by treaty, because a law if found to operate disadvantageously to the country, may be repealed, while the treaty must subsist for the term fixed in itself. At the same time we believe that such a measure, whether framed in the shape of a law or a treaty, could not fail to operate advantageously for this country.

In answer to those who represent as an impediment to new treaties, that clause in most of the existing treaties of the United States with other countries, "promising them the same advantages as are enjoyed by the most. favored nations," I would repeat what I have said in a previous article, that it does not appear to stand in the way; since all those countries can obtain the same advantages according to true reciprocity, provided they will grant to the United States similar profitable reductions on their tariff system, as the German States are willing to give. They could only justly complain in case the United States should refuse to extend to them a

similar reciprocity. What can this clause mean, if it does not mean, that in case of new treaties being formed with other nations, and advantages thereby given, nations in whose favor that clause exists may claim the same advantages, but only on the same condition. They can consequently only claim to be treated on the same footing, viz. to be allowed to give the same advantages in return for new favors granted. If other nations do not mean that for their profit the reciprocity ought to be all on one side, they can in fairness have no objection to this interpretation.

It is intended that the benefits of the above mentioned law shall extend to all those countries who will also by treaty or by law extend similar advantages to the importation from Germany into those countries. A similar treaty exists already between this country and the Hanse Towns, but it is limited to the vessels alone, while the plan of the Zollverein favors not only the vessels but the products of this country in a greater degree than heretofore. In advocating such means, the Zollverein States wish in no manner whatsoever to injure the Hanse Towns, but rather to advance their interests, as we have shown in an article in the February number of this Magazine, to which we refer.

It will be necessary to point out more fully some of the advantages which would result from the extension of direct commerce between the United States and Germany, and to enumerate some of the present disadvantages under which that trade is carried on.

The laws of most European countries, of England, France and Holland, for instance, favor very essentially their own shipping and their commerce with their colonies, treating unfavorably and impeding the shipping of other countries. They have frustrated a freer and more liberal intercourse among nations by their colonial policy-a policy founded on the idea of a restricted trade and monopolized intercourse between the mother country and the colony, to the exclusion of the rest of the world. There can be no real reciprocity between nations thus treating their colonies and other countries, and those nations who possess no colonies.

Germany has heretofore treated the vessels of all other countries very favorably, but she sees herself compelled by the restrictive commercial policy of some countries to grant reductions of duties only to those nations who are willing to favor her. She looks in this respect particularly to the United States of America, because they as well as Germany having no colonies to favor, possessing vast territory and millions of industrious inhabitants on both sides,* can mutually establish true and fair reciprocity, which other countries deny to both of them. They, therefore, have it in their power to establish a new, fair and firm commercial policy, as soon as they sincerely will it, and can thereby compel other countries to come to fairer terms with them.

It is the true policy of the United States, and of Germany, to hold out to other nations the offer of a truly reciprocal trade.

Other European countries have heretofore, by their commercial policy, succeeded in monopolizing a great part of the trade between the United States and Germany. They carry American goods either to their entrepots in England, Holland, &c., and from there to Germany, or carry them directly to the latter country. This trade could be carried on directly by German and American vessels; and it would be more profitable for both nations to use

* The States of the Zollverein contain about twenty-eight millions.

their own ships, than those of other nations. The freight from the United States, to England or Holland, is not lower than the freight to the German ports of the North sea, and only very little lower than to the ports of the Baltic. The combined freight of the United States to England, and from an English entrepot to a German port, is evidently higher than the freight of a direct shipment from the United States to a German port. When direct and unrestricted commerce between two countries is carried on by means of their own vessels, the exchange of their goods will give them equal profits-then, only, is it possible to maintain a firm commercial intercourse. Importation and exportation then support each other, particularly since the reduction of duties in favor of such a direct trade would insure profit, in preference to the indirect trade of other countries, and since ships used for this direct trade would not have to wait in port so long as heretofore for a cargo, and much would be saved thereby.

German manufacturers are at present compelled to buy a great deal of American raw material-for instance, cotton-in the English or other entrepots. If those goods from foreign countries were directly sent to Germany, a great market would be formed there. The demand of Germany for cotton, tobacco, sugar, coffee, rice, and so forth, being very large, and the additional expenses of commissions, agents, freight, &c., now paid in the English entrepots, then being saved, Germany could afford to buy greater quantities of foreign (particularly of American) goods. In illustration of the present trade of Germany with this country, we annex the following

STATEMENT OF THE COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES WITH THE ZOLLVEREIN OF GERMANY.

The principal articles of export from the United States to Germany, are: Tobacco, cotton, fish-oil, rice, sugar, pot and pearl ashes, whalebone, rosin, hops, quercitron bark, provisions, (beef and pork,) lead. These are all products of the United States. Besides these, there are exported from this country to Germany products of South America, East and West Indies, Mexico, and China; namely, dye-woods, tea, cassia, pepper, pimento, cochineal, &c.

The principal ports of export of this country to Germany, are :-New York, which exports nearly all the above-named articles; New Orleans, cotton, Kentucky tobacco, lead, provisions, and sugar; Baltimore, chiefly Maryland tobacco, and some quercitron bark; Richmond and Petersburgh, Va., tobacco and stems; Charleston, cotton and rice; New Bedford and Nantucket, Mass., and some other ports of less importance in Rhode Island, Connecticut, &c., fish oil; Philadelphia and Boston, only a few cargoes, consisting of various articles; Mobile and Savannah, cotton.

The principal ports of entry at the Zollverein, are Hamburg and Bremen; but there are sent to Stettin from ten to fifteen cargoes of fish-oil and rice annually, and about two-thirds of the exports to Holland and Antwerp go from thence to the Zollverein.

To form a correct idea of the consumption of American products in the Zollverein States, it must be observed that much is also imported to Germany, via England and France.